About your Search

20130201
20130209
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
that senator dianne feinstein was forced to call a brief recess. after things got under control brennan had to deal with tough and necessary questions and here is part of his exchange with senator mark o-rubio about the benghazi terrorist attack, watch this. >> have you talked to folks in the cia about their impressions of the quality of information we're getting from our foreign partners? >> yes, on a regular basis. >> and they've indicated-- would it surprise you to know that they've indicated to us repeatedly over the last couple of years that i've been here that the information he we get directly is much better than anything we get from our foreign partners on some of these issues. >> that's why we work with the foreign partners and get the-- >> i'm concerned because al harzi, i think how you pronounce the name and a suspect in the benghazi attack and he was taken into custody by the tunisians. >> yes, he was taken into custody. >> did we not ask for access to them. >> the tunisians didn't have the law. >> they released him. >> he's still in tunisia. >> you're fully comfortable with thi
, me, or saxby chambliss and dianne feinstein but not anybody else? until we literally bludgeoned them into agreeing to include everybody. like carl levin's not trustworthy? you know, i think it's amazing. >> i don't think he meant literally bludgeoned. but still. this was the really unexpected clear partisan divide of the day. democrats demanding more ability to oversee what the intelligence community does, more access to more information by more people including their staffers. and republicans chastising john brennan for what they view as him providing too much information to the public, not keeping enough secrets. you always hear that there is broad bipartisan agreement on matters of intelligence and national security in washington now. that was not the case today. at least on this issue. and that's not necessarily a bad thing. but it tells you that we really do still have two very different parties in this country when it comes to national security. common wisdom be damned. ? you ask a ford customer. when they tell you that you need your oil changed you got to bring it in. if your
last month by senator dianne feinstein, and that you heard mentioned again today by the president. now, that's not necessarily a done deal. that's not necessarily final. if that bill reaches the senate, the senate floor without a ban on assault weapons included, it is possible lawmakers could then amend the bill on the senate floor to include the ban. but they also might not. sam stein at "huffington post" reported today that the assault weapons ban might be strategically sacrificed in order for the rest of the president's plan to go through. sam stein reporting that advocates for gun control are not as concerned about the assault weapons ban as they are with some other elements of the president's package. jim kessler of americans for gun safety says, quote, if you are going to die at the hands of a criminal with a gun, it's going to be a handgun. and statistically speaking, which is what he means, that might be true. but it's not handguns that people remember from a tragedy like what happened at sandy hook elementary in december. it's assault weapons that now appear so difficult in po
? >> dianne feinstein, the chair of the committee yesterday still saying yesterday they wanted the original documents. then today on our program at 1:00, the house chairman, who carries a lot of weight about and has is very supportive, a former fbi guy, a republican, though, said he also thought the original memos should be turned over, that the white paper that had been turned over to them last summer that michael isikoff uncovered and reported first on your show was not good enough. that it needed to finally be the actual legal guidance that was turned over to the oversight committees. and we're talking about the two intelligence committees, rachel, who handle classified information all the time. and there haven't been any leaks out of those committees. so they were facing a confirmation hearing that was potentially contentious. and also, other answers were given to the committee that were revealed today from john brennan. we can talk about that after a moment. they knew that there were other issues they were going to have to deal with. they needed to get this off the table. >> well, in t
and hillary clinton and joe biden and dianne feinstein and chuck schumer and 24 other democrats in the senate and all but one of the republicans in the senate all voted yes. and yeah, there were democrats who were against the war from the beginning. and that one republican, lincoln chaffee. but there were enough democrats who said yes and went along with it. that's part of the reason the war happened. the difference over time is that republican chuck hagel and most of the democrats who were wrong about iraq, they figured out that they were wrong and they turned against the war and ultimately they tried to end the war because it had been a mistake. we can say mistake in the technical sense here, right? the war was started to go get weapons of mass destruction from saddam and to stop saddam from helping al qaeda. well, saddam had no relationship with al qaeda that we were stopping. and saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. it was wrong. the war was factually wrong. right? we have learned that. this is not a controversial assertion. john mccain led the senate today in trying ton just stop c
the equation and take all the guns out, that senator feinstein wants to take out -- wait a minute. you're still left with 2,200 guns you can legally buy. >> the problem is you're obsessing over one gun that a bad human being has used a couple of times. >> no, no, wait. >> no, no, let me finish. hold on a second. >> the past five mass shootings in america. >> guess what, the last shooting that i could have been a victim of, it wasn't an ar-15. you're obsessed over the ar-15. have you ever had a gun to your head? >> no. >> have you ever had a man look you in the eyes and say i'm going to your head off? >> no. >> with expletives while grinning? i had a gun to defend myself. i didn't have an ar-15. he didn't have an ar-15. >> why would you need an ar-15 in that situation? >> you're missing the point. >> i'm not missing the point. >> anything is an assault weapon when it's in the bad hands of the bad person. the gun used that night was not on the special list that the senator wants to have out there, the list of guns. you know what? that gun that night was just as dangerous to my life. >> sure. >> w
-- that is essentially dead on arrival anyway. >> if diane feinstein doesn't have the assault weapons at least let her have an opportunity to offer this amendment. >> will you vote for it? >> i don't know, frankly -- and she knows i didn't read her amendment. i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense, but i'll take a look at it. >> joining me now to take a look at it. editor for the new republic, good to see you, my friend. >> thanks for having me on the show, ezra. >> so that didn't sound enormously encouraging from harry reid, kind of sounded like the assault weapons ban will get a bit of a pro forma vote and that is about it. >> i think everybody knew going into the fight the different elements of the gun legislation agenda, that the assault weapons ban would be one that had the hardest road ahead. in part because you know you still need 60 votes to pass anything in the senate. and in part because the republicans control the house. and in part because the gun lobby has made this a very hard vote to have. now, i don't think it is a lost cause. i think if you believ
. >> well, if the assault weapons ban came in that senator feinstein wants in, backed by the president, there would still be despite the assault weapons ban she recommends 2,200 guns legally obtainable to american civilians. you know what? that is enough. anyway, mark glaze and lenden eakin, thank you both very much. >>> coming up next, l.a. reid talks x factor, simon cowell, whitney houston, and tells us his grammy predictions. she keeps you guessing. it's part of what you love about her. but your erectile dysfunction - you know, that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol i
feinstein eventually cleared the room. later, brennan cited the protesters when he address what had he called a misperception about the goal of the drone strikes. let's listen. >> i think there is a misimpression on the part of some american people who believe that we take strikes to punish terrorists for past transgressions. nothing could be further from the truth. we only take such actions as a last resort to save lives when there's no other alternative to taking an action that's going to mitigate that threat. so we need to make sure there is an understanding and the people that were standing up here today, i think they really have a misunderstanding of what we do as a government and the care that we take and the agony that we go through to make sure that we do not have any collateral injuries or deaths. >> robin, when he described this as a last resort to save lives, one reaction i had is among the lives we save when we use drones are those of troops who otherwise would be going into harm's way. >> absolutely. i lived in beirut when jesse jackson had to hold his nose and go to damas
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)